A CULTURE UNTO ITSELF

Many factors influence the desirability of luxury timepieces, and current trends tug firmly at a culture for collecting them. But for better or worse?

FEW HOBBIES HAVE ECCENTRICITIES that match those of watch collecting. Passionate enthusiasts often go to extreme lengths to acquire specific timepieces. The hobby is a resource-intensive one. Collections may be measured either by the time it took to gather them, their combined monetary cost, or sheer rarity. Intrinsic value, it seems, is inextricably tied to desirability.

Steeped In Luxury

Watches and social status have a shared history that goes back to 1510 when the first pocket watch was made. The skill required to miniaturise a time-keeping movement meant that only the wealthy could afford to benefit from this expertise. The use of rare metals such as gold and platinum in the casework further elevated the status of the pocket watch to a luxury item. As such, pocket watches were often indicative of a family in good standing and treated as heirlooms, passed on from father to son.

The addition of rare metals and jewels in watchmaking, along with refinements in the craft, gave rise to a more grandiose image for the pocket watch. In what is perhaps horology’s most recognised example of a celebrity endorsement, Queen Marie Antoinette commissioned Abraham-Louis Brequet to make an automatic-winding pocket watch in 1782, one which contained all known complications at the time. While it wasn’t uncommon for the social elite to commission reputed watchmakers, it is interesting how this particular example resulted in what is now known as “hype”.

The Queen Consort of Naples, Caroline Bonaparte, purchased 34 timepieces from Breguet throughout her lifetime (including the first wristwatch Breguet ever produced). Many believe her support was borne out of the former Queen of France’s influence (and perhaps that of her older brother Napoleon ‒ another Breguet fan). It is worth noting that many members of the Bonaparte family were Breguet loyalists. They owned some 100 examples between them.

Prone To Craziness

More contemporary examples of “watch hype” can be seen in the Swiss brands Omega and Rolex, with their Speedmaster and Explorer timepieces, respectively. The Omega Speedmaster Professional is often associated with Neil Armstrong, the first man to set foot on the moon.

Similarly, the Rolex Explorer is often also called “the Everest watch”. But neither claims are technically true. It was Buzz Aldrin who kept his Speedmaster on as he set foot on the lunar surface. And Sir Edmund Hillary had left his Oyster Perpetual at base camp while Tenzing Norgay wore his when he summited. Nevertheless, the marketing strategies for Omega and Rolex proved immensely effective. The cultural relevance of the Speedmaster and the Explorer resulted in these tool watches ‒ timepieces that prioritise function over form ‒ being vaunted to aspirational purchases.

The presence and influence of hype in watch collecting are undeniable. From rappers such as Jay Z weaving Richard Mille into his lyrics, to influencers flaunting their collections online, pop culture and new media have paved the way to a market like never before.

Take, for instance, the Rolex Ref. 6241 “Paul Newman” Daytona ‒ one of the most sought-after timepieces in the world and a “grail” for many collectors. In 1988, the

Ref. 6241 had an estimated value of between $3,000 and $3,500. Fast forward to 2020, and that same reference commanded an estimated value of between $129,000 and $258,000 at Sotheby’s. Adjusted for inflation, that’s an appreciation of almost 3,300 per cent. Contrast this against the Daytona that debuted in 1963 with a retail cost of $210 (approximately $1,778 in 2020). So if we were to track the total appreciation of the “Paul Newman”

rare occasion they do end up on the auction block, a hefty premium can certainly be expected.

The Social Conundrum

The combination of romanticism and controlled availability has proven to be a prize-winning formula. Limited-edition and collaboration timepieces are often considered must-haves, due either to their unique aesthetics or finite production. However, the lines become blurred when one attempts to establish a working precedent. Does a timepiece limited to 6,000 examples qualify as “limited edition” the same way a 100-pieceonly collection does? Is it marketing that determines whether a watch is limited-edition, or the timepiece itself? Traditionally, watches were limited in production due to the time it took to produce them as well as the availability of materials ‒ not particularly relevant in today’s advanced era of industrialisation. Regardless of the rationale, the widespread presence of limited-edition timepieces across most price points has become an accepted norm within the watch community.

Social media has also played a big part in stoking the fires of collectorship. Platforms like Instagram are rife with enthusiasts showcasing their collections and new acquisitions. What occurs then is a ripple effect in the community. When an outsider desires to join a fraternity, it is only natural to align themselves to the group’s “code”, be it their social norms, behaviour or language. Throw in the fact that social media is visually driven, and frequent high-volume activity is often a pre-requisite for popularity. For the newcomer, the standard becomes as such: watch collecting becomes more about amassing a sizeable collection, along with a never-ending rotation of new purchases. As more members internalise this mentality, the culture gains greater visibility and credibility.

Kevin Koh, 27, is an avid collector whose journey began when his mother bought him his first mechanical watch

‒ a Rolex Daytona Ref. 116523 with a “panda” dial ‒ as a graduation gift for completing his GCE ‘O’ Levels. In his eyes, the notion of “collecting” has changed drastically with the prevalence of new media. “I think the term now is used very loosely, especially in the world of fine timepieces. Mass hype by way of social media and pop culture can lead some people to “collect” watches they barely know anything about or worse, have no personal connection to,” he says. “Before, it was about spending hours upon hours researching on the pieces you were passionate about; finding any relevant information you can before eventually making the purchase.”